that does it for us tonight. we will see you again tomorrow night. meanwhile lots to add what you've seen on the show tonight. we're very proud of our blog at maddowblog at msnbc.com. now it's time for "the last word with lawrence o'donnell." >> i never thought we'd be taking the mood down when we take over from you. but we may just actually do it tonight. >> it's the tea party coloring book. >> now i'm intimidated. >> thanks, rachel. >> bye, lawrence. the bush tax cuts are now set to expire at the end of the year, and today that trap caught dozen of democrats. >> 34 days now to the midterms. >> democrats say yes, republicans say never. >> give the house an opportunity

in a fair and open debate to extend all of the current tax rates. >> 39 house democrats defect today and join an attempt to avoid tax cuts now. >> the nays are 209. >> speaker pelosi has to cast the deciding vote at the end of the week. >> irresponsibility on the part of this congress. >> and now they're about to walk away without even voting to protect americans. congress must not adjourn until we vote. >> the president finally uses the bully bull pit to bully. >> the policies we fought so hard for to change in 2008. >> but in the politics of taxation, can reality trump myth. >> somehow there's a myth out there, that we have raised taxes on small businesses. in fact we've lowered taxes on just about everybody. >> he's pushed for progressive taxation, he's going after the

rich. he's done what a progressive should have tried to do. >> good evening from new york. i'm lawrence owe only do. you can run, but you can never hide from the great never ending tax debate. republicans will never let you. they believe the party of less taxes will always beat the party of more taxes as long as the voters are listening to the debate. >> mr. reagan will raise taxes, and so will i. he won't tell you, i just did. >> because the deficit has increased so much, beyond my earlier estimates, and beyond even the worst official government estimates from last year. we just have to face the fact that to make the changes our country needs, more americans must contribute today so that all americans can do better tomorrow. >> make the tax relief permanent. members of congress should know. if any bill raises taxes reaches

my desk, i will veto it. >> bill clinton's tax increase, the biggest one of all time, was preamble to a democratic loss of the house and senate in 1994, democrats had feared any form of tax increase since then. never mind that the economy s r soared to unprecedented heights. democrats once again lost the tax debate to republicans. barack obama wouldn't tax debate in the presidential campaign, arguing for an increase only for the top bracket. but that was then, and this is now. i discussed the current 125statf play with david axelrod in an interview taped earlier today. david axelrod, thanks for joining us today. this afternoon -- >> good to be with you, lawrence. >> the house decided to adjourn in a shockingly close vote. that's never a close vote, but it was today. 39 democrats voted against

adjournment without taking action on the current tax rates. some democrats were eager to go home, others were eager to stay in washington and fix this. so who's right, the go home now democrats or the fix taxes first democrats? >> well, the question really is, what about the hold the tax cut hostage republicans, and that's really what this debate has been about from the beginning. we all agree, republicans and democrats that we ought to extend these tax cuts up to $250,000 a year. that would take in 98% of the american people, give the middle class the tax cuts that they really need after getting battered over the course of the last decade. the republican party, mr. mcconnell, mr. bainer have said, no, that's not good enough, we want to spend $700 billion over the next ten years to give tax cuts to the wealthiest americans, millionaires and billionaires and our position

is, we don't have $700 billion for that. that's not going to markedly help the economy. it's the least effective form of stimulus, and yet mr. mcconnell said, if it wasn't in the bill, he would filibuster that, on the senate side. so the real issue is, when are the republicans going to sit down with us and say, okay, we agree on this much. let's remove the uncertainty for middle class americans, and let them know come january first they're not going to see a too much increase. >> what do you make of the 39 democrats that sided with the republicans on this? does that spell trouble when the democrats eventually do take up this tax question in the house? >> i don't think so. i think among those 39 you're going to find people who are very eager to end this uncertainty, continue the middle class tax cut. i understand that, it's very clear we would be enmeshed in a game of cat and mouse with the

republicans over this, because they're so committed to this. the thing that makes this so interesting to me is that when they released their pledge last week and talk about the things that they would do if they had control, they said, we want to end the end of the recovery act. and half of those unobligated funds would be in something called the making work pay tax cut that we implemented that goes to the middle class, so 110 middle class families would see their taxes go up under the republican plan. and yet they're fighting fiercely to take care of millionaires and billionaires. >> you're trying to hold on to the house and the senate in the midst of the worst recession since world war ii. there's an article in "the new republic" this week that came out that says, during the transition, after a meeting about the economy, before the president was sworn in, you told the president-elect -- you predicted -- that his numbers

would be in the toilet in 12 to 18 months and then "all of us who were geniuses are going to be idiots." is this what you meant that those economic numbers were going to control our politics and the democrats and the president's pop layerity and polling numbers were going to sink because of the economy? >> well, i'm not sure if i said in the toilet. >> no, that was not in quotation marks. that part's not in quotation marks, david. >> i did say they were going to be a lot different than they were right there. it's a -- look, lawrence, you're a student of this business, you've been around it a long time. when you're sitting with your economists and they tell you the president-elect, we're in the midst of a recession that could be as deep as anything we've seen since the great depression, and there's a one in three chance we might have a great depression, you know you're not walking into a great political environment, and they always

made clear it was going to take a long time to deal with the damage that this had done. beyond that, we also knew in terms of the election itself, we had two bumper crops of wins legislatively in 2006 and 2008, 55 seats we won during those elections, midterm elections as you know, traditionally are tough for the party and for all those reasons, i felt it was going to be challenging, and it is challenging. >> david, you have the president out on the road and the buck up and stick with me tour, trying to hold on to democrats' power. and we had on this show last night, one of the leaders of the groups that the president's talking to, adam green. he's the leader of the progressive change campaign committee. he was encouraged by what he heard in wisconsin yesterday. primarily because he heard the president use the word fight. his point was, he doesn't think that you and the president, when

it comes to legislating, when it comes to governing are fighting. and i guess someone has to break it to adam green and others that no one fights. these guys in neckties do not fight. they ask each other to do things and they are empowered to say no. and their outcomes are not controlled by campaign rhetoric or by the image of the presidency. who's going to break that to the people who are disappointed in what the president's achieved? >> well, lawrence, let me say, first of all, that on the first point, we have achieved a great deal. as i said, you've been around a long time. when you consider the things that we've gotten done under a very difficult circumstances over the last two years, health insurance reform, financial reform, landmark education reform, doubling the use of renewable energy, putting us on that path. raising fuel efficiency standards for the first time in 28 years, and a whole host of

other things, you know, those are things that we ought to embrace, we ought to celebrate. and now we have to protect because the republican party wants to roll back all of that, and go back to the very same policies that punished the middle class, exploded the deficits and plunged our economy into the catastrophe that we faced when we walked into office. so we have a fight on our hands right now, and we need all hands on deck in that fight. that's the point the president's making, that's the point that the vice president made the other night on your show. and by the way, anyone who thinks that it didn't take a struggle to do some of these things wasn't paying attention, obviously health care was an epic battle. i don't think there's been a legislative battle like it in our generation. financial reform was an epic battle. the capitol was awash with lobbyists from wall street and it was an extraordinary victory that enabled us to move forward with the kinds of reforms that

we did, that put elizabeth warren in the position to do the things that she can do for consumers now. and so on. i think we have a lot to be proud of. and we have a lot of work ahead of us. what we can't afford now is to have these intramural debates, while there's so much at stake. that's the point the president is trying to make all over this country. >> it seems to me what you've come up against is the politics of campaigning and the politics of governing. in the politics of campaigning you can say anything, and you can use the word fight and say i'm going to provide health care to all americans. and the politics of governing are limited by other people's interests. in the campaign where i never second guessed you once. people would criticize the obama campaign at different points, i never did. i was watching a flawless campaign that was running better than i could have ever imagined. in the politics of governing, i think there have been some mistakes. during the campaign, people would say, who's right on health

care, hillary or obama? it's not up to them, it's up to a guy named max baucus who you've never heard of, and that turned out to be true. there was an overpromising in the campaign, heated rhetoric in the campaign which can never ever be delivered in the processes of congress, and the disappointed base has yet to come to terms with that. >> yeah, lawrence, you speak for experience, because you worked for the chairman of the finance committee in the senate. but the truth is, that i think the emphasis is in the wrong place. i don't think the surprising thing is what we haven't gotten done, the surprising thing is how much we've gotten done. we've been working on that health care issue for a century in this country. you were around for some of those fights. the degree to which we were able to move on that issue, to the point where we have a patient's bill of rights on steroids, to

keep people from being discriminated against, people being seriously ill from being thrown off their insurance. seniors more prescription drug protection, all of that. and the ability for people who don't have health insurance to be able to buy it at a price they can afford. all of that as part of this. that to me is something to feel very positive about. and, you know, i think it's a mistake to say, but, it wasn't -- it's 80% of what we've been fighting for for a century. we didn't get 100%, and, therefore, it's not quite right. that's not -- you're quite right about one thing, that's not governance, governance is about make compromises, but compromises that don't compromise your fundamental goal or principle. and you have to do the first in order to get things done. if you do the second, then it's not worth getting things done. i think the president did it the right way. >> white house senior adviser david axelrod, thanks for your

time today. >> thanks for having me on, lawrence. how will tea party candidates fit in on capitol hill. are tea party members racist? and in an audience-demanded follow-up to levi johnston's appearance last night, we will compare his answers to sarah palin's answers to the same questions. maybe you want to rebuild homes for those in need? or, maybe you want to help improve our schools? whatever you want to do, members project from american express can help you take the first step. vote, volunteer or donate for the causes you believe in at membersproject.com. take charge of making a difference. with pringles cracker stix. ♪ crackers turned into tasty, crunchy sticks! ♪

pringles cracker stix. ♪ so delicious... your mouth will be strangely attracted to them. ♪ everything pops with pringles cracker stix.

can the tea party survive? matt taibbi takes us inside the movement to see what is really motivating supporters. bob woodward will be here for his inside look at the obama white house. and an exclusive preview of how the writers at funny or die.com are handling the don't ask don't tell debate. helps you. that's right, penny. do you know ours? heavens to betsy. dwayne the bathtub. magic wanda. yeah! what's mine? uh, you're a dan fool.

oh. it's just a device, dan. you can't take it personally. yeah, i suppose. [ male announcer ] we understand. you need a partner who helps you save. fedex ground. [ male announcer ] we understand. you need a partner who helps you save. host: could switching to geico realis a bird in the handre on worth 2 in the bush? appraiser: well you rarely see them in this good of shape. appraiser: for example the fingers are perfect. appraiser: the bird is in mint condition. appraiser: and i would say if this were to go to auction today, appraiser: conservatively it would be worth 2 in the bush. woman: really? appraiser: it's just beautiful, thank you so much for bringing it in. woman: unbelievable anncr: geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more.

the relationship between the tea party and the republican party establishment has been so far awkward at best. but with just 34 days until the midterm elections, both parties are pretending they have taken rodney king's moving message to heart and they do indeed get along. republican strategist richard vig vigorie told the new york times we're all on the same page until the polls close november 2nd. and then the massive battle for the heart and soul of the american people begins. 71% of people who call

themselves republicans are also supporters of the tea party. 71%. that's a far cry from the tea party's humble beginnings on the republican party's fringe well outside that so-called big tent. so what changed? the radical transformation is the subject of a new "rolling stone" article called tea and crackers, how corporate interests and republican insider s built the tea party monster. the author of the piece is matt taibbi. matt, before we get to the transformation, one of the central questions about the tea party, and one of the accusations that flies around, is that this is a racist group. predominantly racist group, partially racist group, or more racist than your average collection on a subway car in new york city. you've been in and among them. >> right. >> what's the answer to the tea party racist question?

>> my answer,it's not so much about hating black people for these people. it's more about believing in this preposterous fantasy that white people are some kind of oppressed minority in the age of obama. i don't know whether that's racism, but it's just incredibly stupid. and that's really my answer. i think there's not that much overt racism, clearly race is a factor in almost all of their political views. but it's really more like a collective narcissistic -- >> they're working without a historical framework for anyone else's experience except their own and their own families? >> right. >> that's what you're calling the narcissistic view of our politics? >> they really believe in the sort of idea that they're this persecuted oppressed people, and they have no frame of reference about anybody else's experience. and they also don't have any sense of how their rhetoric is received by the rest of the country. you just think of the whole idea of the tea party.

if they're the tea partiers, people like you and me are red coats, we're literally not americans, we're unamerican. and it's -- they really believe that. >> the narcissism is why we're playing the carly simon song. it's nothing to do with you. how does this movement change, and let's get to the core of this history question of where it started. there's a reporter at cnbc who claims and people claim he started the tea party. >> rick santelli. >> was there something of a tea party before his outburst on cnbc. >> yes, and it was directly in line with the ron paul presidential campaign. i remember some of those gatherings. what we have now is sort of tea party 2.0. it's a second kind of wave of tea partiers that coalesce after

that rick santelli outburst on tv. it's interesting i remember in the 2008 campaign when i covered it, that people who are now tea partiers were barring ron paul supporters from their events. they were separate groups of people then and they're the same now. >> you argued that the case of rand paul as a nominee shows how the republican interest and the republican party has co opted the tea party, beginning with an incident that occurred in this very studio where rachael mad dow interviewed ron paul back in may. we're going to take a look at that. >> i don't want to be badgering you on this, but i do want an answer, do you think a private business -- >> i'm not in favor of any discrimination of any form. but i think what's important about this debate is not written

into any specific gotcha on this. but asking the question, what about freedom of speech? should we limit speech from people we find abhorrent? should we limit racists from speak something. >> i think there was an overriding problem in the south, that was so big it did require federal intervention in the '60s, and it stemmed from things that i said, going on really 120 years too long. and the southern states weren't correcting it and i think there was a need for federal intervention. >> what a difference a day made in that response. what happened overnight? >> well, from what i understand, right after that appearance, the paul campaign was contacted by people like karl rove and there was influence from mitch mcconnell and rand paul was asked to cancel media appearances including "meet the press." which was interesting because before that moment rand paul and

mitch mcconnell had been distinctly separate entities. before you knew it, mcconnell was doing fund-raisers for rand paul. and that's the change. >> you do strike a note of sympathy in here when you say at times their desire to withdraw from the brutality complex global economic system that is an irrevokable fact of our modern life and get back to a simpler world that no longer exists is so intense it breaks your heart. >> it's similar when you see protests on the left, protests against the brutally complex global economic system. >> that's the key appeal of the tea party, it provides simple solutions for incredibly complex problems. you know, it -- the solution to everything in the tea party ideology is market good, government bad. that's the thing that everybody can understand. and that's what the appeal is for these people. it's just not that simple.

the world has gotten too big, there's no way to waive that magic wand. and that's part of where the frustration comes from. >> matt taibbi, thanks for your time tonight. >> thank you. bob woodward joins me to describe the behind the scenes power struggle between the commander in chief and his generals as they plan a new way forward in afghanistan. and more on the world wide reaction to my interview last night with levi johnston. with fire in its veins. bold. daring. capable of moving your soul. ♪ and that's even before you drop your foot on the pedal. ♪ the new 2011 cts coupe from cadillac. the new standard of the world.

levi johnston, the almost son-in-law of half term governor sarah palin joined me on this show last night. he's a really good sport about coming here. and, yes, he's very good looking. i like him a lot. i have no doubt why bristol was so smitten. i wasn't so sure america would care that i got him to sit down and answer some political questions. i was wrong. >> live on the view. levi johnston's first interview since announcing he's running for mayor of wasilla. >> barbara, i'm going to turn this over to you. >> i was concerned last night to see an interview that lawrence o'donnell did. he has a new show at 10:00 at

night, and i stayed up and watched it. he was interviewing levi johnston. a little knowledge, a limb background. >> can you really take it seriously? >> you can't make it up. >> you really can't make it up. and i didn't make up those questions, they were actually katie couric's questions to sarah palin. later we'll go to the videotape so you can see sarah and levi go head-to-head on the same questions. it may just change your opinion of levi's performance. also ahead, woodward, obama's wars inside the white house. the definitive picture of barack obama as commander in chief. and later, a funny or die world exclusive, we'll preview its sketch on don't ask don't tell. dream. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 it's either this magic number i'm supposed to reach, or... tdd# 1-800-345-2550 it's beach homes or it's starting a vineyard.

tdd# 1-800-345-2550 come on! tdd# 1-800-345-2550 just help me figure it out in a practical, tdd# 1-800-345-2550 let's-make-this-happen kind of way. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 a vineyard? give me a break. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 [ male announcer ] looking for real-life answers tdd# 1-800-345-2550 to your retirement questions? tdd# 1-800-345-2550 get real. get started. talk to chuck. tdd# 1-800-345-2550

in one scene from bob woodward's new book on the obama administration's struggle to find an exit plan in the war in afghanistan, then vice president elect joe biden makes the rounds with the troops, asking everyone from colonels to sergeants to the guys on the front lines, what are we trying to do here? almost everyone, he said, gave him a different answer or just replied simply, i don't know. the obama war plan in afghanistan is the subject of bob woodward's 16th book, "obama's wars." in our spotlight tonight, bob woodward. bob, can you imagine vice president cheney in that same scene of yours that i just recounted about joe bind? >> probably not. he wouldn't go around and ask that question. that wasn't necessarily his style. at the same time, it's conceivable.

but as you know, biden has this curiosity and this drive and this kind of soulful engagement with people and so he goes out and says, hey, what are you doing here? and he was very -- this was at the beginning of the administration, actually before they took office. he made the trip to afghanistan and pakistan. and it upset him deeply, and rightfully so that the soldiers on the ground didn't exactly know what the mission was. >> it really strikes me in this book what a big presence biden is and how open he is with you. i couldn't help compare it to the cheney presence or nonpresence in your four-book series where cheney was one of the four people who refused to communicate with you -- >> actually, that's not true. there's a good deal of cheney in those books.

cheney is a hold it type. biden is the opposite of let it go. and one of the interesting parts here is the relationship between obama and biden. and i asked obama about this, and i said, you know, don't -- isn't joe a little heavy handed here? doesn't he go too long too far? no, obama said, he's doing exactly what i want. i want him to push in the strategy review sessions, and during this whole process up to a couple months ago as i report. biden is asking the questions, worried profoundly about getting into another vietnam. and he's 19 years older than obama, remembers vietnam. gets in his face about it. >> now, every one of these books provokes a round of apologies in washington. there's the famous now biden quote about richard holbrooke

being egotistical. and as you continue in the book, but he is probably the best guy for the job. i had the vice president on monday night, was his first interview since that quote came out. and he was dealing with me with that quote, while dick holbrooke was here having completed an interview with "the rachel maddow show" before this. do you feel the press will grab little nuggets like that out of this book, which is so much more important than an individual's ego or adjectives about an individual? do you feel the press seizes on that so easily? >> sometimes, but it's part of the story. this book and the national security team are key, like any team. and there is antagonism and there is name calling and there is distrust. and when you look at it, try to step back, what is the show, it

shows many unsettled areas in the war in terms of this strategy. what are we really trying to do? what is july of next year mean in terms of draw down. does the present have the will to win. does he not use that kind of, yes, we can language about the war as he did when he was seeking the office of president. >> and he certainly doesn't use the certainty that appears in president bush in your earlier books on this same war. it's so interesting the difference between these approaches as your books reveal, president bush very decisive at many stages in your books where when we look back on it, we can think, ah, i wish he had maybe had one more meeting on that one, especially maybe weapons of mass destruction? gone over that information one more time. this is the president that seems to me who does have the extra

meeting and does take into full consideration all of the variables. >> he does. and this is the conflict within obama, quite frankly. he's commander in chief, he knows and he committed himself in the campaign, to make this the war we were going to pay attention to. intellectually he looks at the data, the intelligence on the afghan war, and there's a lot of dreary negative news. in fact, just back in may he came out of one of the monthly reviews, the top secret kind of assessments they make in the situation room at the white house, and said, given this definition of the problem, i don't know how we come up with a solution. so this is a war that hangs in the balance. it's not clear where it's going. and this is the portrait of him, unvarnished, unspun, detail

after detail, meeting -- there are thousands of words where he is talking, where he's asking questions. and you're absolutely right, it's different from bush. bush's meetings were essentially, my gut tells me we should invade iraq. how are we going to do it? now, he did have lots of meetings about how, and i think as rumsfeld and general tommy franks convinced it was going to be easy. paul wolfowitz said it would take seven days, the war. it looked easy, and so we had a launch. and, of course, we're still there. >> ultimately, the picture that emerges in your series on the bush administration, war making machine, operation, it became a truly dysfunctional system with generals afraid to say exactly what they thought to rumsfeld, with people wondering, exactly what is cheney saying privately to bush, after we leave the meeting that's supposed to be about this subject?

circumventing national security process. really an out of control process that ends up being the sum effect of the picture described in those volumes. how does it compare to the process that we see the obama administration dealing with? >> this is much more systematic, look, obama law professor, and what would you do as a law professor, you give a's to people who can identify the most issues. what are the questions here? and if you come up with the list of 23 and everyone else comes up with 6, you win the prize. you get -- so it is very cerebral. and this has been and now is very much the debate about the president. is there a little bit of a detachment, emotional detachment, a withdrawal. not because he doesn't care, i mean, i'm convinced he cares. i think this is -- he sought the

office and he lives it, but by being so cerebral, he puts himself, people -- he's not grabbing people. he's not like joe biden going around, hey, what are we doing here? what do you think? >> i had the chance to ask david axelrod today in an interview i taped earlier today about a line in this book. let's hear what he had to say. >> good. >> i just want to ask you, one line involved in woodward's book where general petraeus is quoted after being in a briefing with you, he's quoted as calling you a complete spin doctor, did you take that as a compliment? >> i did, indeed, because as i've said before, general petraeus is probably as good as they come on television, and you've seen him. you probably interviewed him, he's masterful, if he's bestowing that mantle on me, i take it as a compliment. >> bob, quickly, before you

go -- >> one spin doctor to another. >> i'm not going to ask you the question about how do you do it? i know how you do it. i was the subject of the woodward interview back during the clinton administration, when you were working the senate. i got the phone call, the message bob woodward wants to talk to me. there was no question i was going to talk to you. i know everyone else is trying to sell you their version of events, i gotta get in there and sell you my version of events. that's why we all do it. >> it's not just selling. >> i was selling you the truth. >> you were -- i came in with information, specific data points, memos, and so forth. senator moynihan who was your boss at that point, what's he thinking, what's the road he's traveling, and so forth? and so, look, there is -- this is the wonderful good news part about this country is there's a little bit of the secret chair in everyone who wants to believe

in the first amendment and kind of tell their story. and so all we do as reporters, book authors, is sit there and this listen. >> and you came in with more information than any reporter i had ever met. your first question, 30 seconds in. you were at the cabinet meeting on may 7th with the president, everyone says you were taking notes. can i have your notes? i was completely offbalance, didn't know what to do. >> we did get your notes. >> you did, as you always get the notes. bob woodward, thanks for your time tonight. >> thanks. coming up, the latest shout on don't ask don't telecoms from sarah silverman at funny or die. sarah palin called them gotcha questions, levi johnston barrelled through them as best as he could. who handled them better, the governor or the high school dropout?

lady gaga has put the spotlight on don't ask don't tell. now the folks at funny or die have joined in. who's better under pressure, levi johnston or sarah pailen? s drifting into the other lane. [ kim ] i was literally falling asleep at the wheel. it got my attention, telling me that i wasn't paying attention. i had no idea the guy in front of me had stopped short. but my car did. my car did. thankfully, my mercedes did. [ male announcer ] a world you can't predict... demands a car you can trust. the e-class. see your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for exceptional offers through mercedes-benz financial. ♪ [ male announcer ] at ge capital, we're out there every day with clients like jetblue -- financing their fleet, sharing our expertise, and working with people who are changing the face of business in america. after 25 years in the aviation business,

i kind of feel like if you're not having fun at what you do, then you've got the wrong job. my landing was better than yours. no, it wasn't. yes, it was. was not. yes, it was. what do you think? take one of the big ones out? nah. don't ask, don't tell. the law remains in effect despite the eloquent opposition

of president obama and lady gaga. nothing they say seem to impress sarah silverman or her friends at funnyordie.com. and here now is their message. >> i don't think you can fit in the cockpit of an f-16 if you're wearing a tutu, and i don't think it's safe. my tax dollars paid for that jet, and i don't want some gay flying it in his little pink tutu. you probably think that means i don't want balancer inas in our military? not true. i think there are scenarios -- where we need ballerinas behind enemy lines. i just don't want them to be weird gay fruits. >> we don't have enough people translating, our country's in a recession and investigating and discharging gay soldiers and training their replacements is costing us $300 million.

two guys kissing is gross. >> i have osama bin ladin in my sites. the openly gay guy next to me can smell my axe perfume and can't help but kiss me. >> if i'm in the shower with a gay lady, it's like, your body is so soft. i don't want a gay lady thinking like that. >> next chihuahuas wearing sequin vests, that's just math. what's next, unicorns wearing capri pants? >> army uniform on a gay? i'm sorry, but that would be like -- that would be like this mustache on a gay guy, or this motorcycle jacket. it would be wrong. and weird. >> while none of us have actually served our country.

>> we know exactly who we don't want doing it for us. >> we are guys against you serving. >> and we are proud. >> to see more guys against you serving head to thelastword@msnbc.com where even more will be posted soon. coming up, two interviewees, two interviewers, one set of questions. who did better, levi johnston or sarah palin, you decide after the break. did you know prilosec otc

can stop frequent heartburn before it begins? heartburn happens when stomach acid refluxes into the esophagus. prilosec otc uses a unique delayed-release system that protects the medicine as it passes through the stomach's tough acid. then it gets absorbed into the body, turning off many acid-producing pumps at the source. with just one pill a day, you get 24-hour heartburn protection all day and all night. prilosec otc. heartburn gone. power on.

last night levi johnston joined me to talk about his campaign for mayor of wasilla. turns out levi and i have a lot in common. we both hate homework. when my boss isabella povich

ordered me to prepare for the interview, i closed my office door, went online and stole all my questions from katie couric's brilliant 2008 interviews of sarah palin. i leave it to you to decide who had the better answers. >> when it comes to establishing your world view, i was curious what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read? >> i read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press and the media. >> what ones specifically, i'm curious -- >> all of them, any of them that have been in front of me over all these years. >> when it comes to establishing your world view, i'm just curious, what newspapers and magazines do you read regularly? >> i read the frontiersman every once in a while, wasilla. i'm not going to sit here and tell you i read a lot of newspapers, i don't get the new york times, i don't watch a

whole lot of news, i don't watch tv all that often. >> there are man's activities that can be contribute to the issues that we're dealing with now with these impacts. i'm not going to solely blame all of man's activities on changes in climate, because the world's weather patterns are cyclical. >> no, i don't. >> you don't believe it's man made? or you do believe it's man made? >> i don't believe it's man made. >> some people have credited the morning after pill with decreasing the number of abortions. how do you feel about the morning after pill? >> i feel -- that's a girl's decision, same with abstinence. i don't believe in abstinence. >> how do you feel about the morning after pill? >> well, i'm all for contraception and i'm all for any preventative measures that are legal and safe and should be taken. but katie, again, i am one to believe that life starts at the moment of conception.

and -- >> ergo, you don't believe in the morning after pill. >> i would like to see fewer and fewer abortions in the world. i haven't spoken with anyone who disagrees with my position on that. >> if you're having unprotected sex, you get the girl pregnant, you should have the baby. >> i'm sorry i just want to ask you again, do you condone or condemn the morning after pill? >> personally, and this isn't a mccain/palin policy -- >> oh, that's okay, i'm just asking you. >> but personally, i would not chose to participate in that kind of contraception. >> do you believe evolution should be taught as an accepted scientific principle or one of several theorys? >> i believe it should have be taught as an acceptable principle. >> do you believe evolution should be taught as an accepted scientific principle or one of several different theorys. >> you're kind of getting over

my head on some of these questions. i don't know how to answer that question. >> would you support a employer tore yum on foreclosure to keep americans from losing their homes. >> it's going to be a multifaceted solution that has to be found here. >> so you haven't decided whether you'll support it or not? >> would you support a moratorium on foreclosures to help average americans keep their homes? >> i believe i would. >> i know the mccain campaign has called for a surge in afghanistan, but that country is, as you know, traumatically different than iraq. why do you believe additional u.s. troops will solve the problems there. >> because we can't afford to lose in afghanistan, as we can't afford to lose in iraq either. these central fronts on the war on terror -- >> in afghanistan, do you believe additional u.s. troops will solve the problem there? >> i have no idea. >> the united states is deeply unpopular in pakistan, do you think the pakistani government is protecting al qaeda within its borders. >> i don't believe that new

president zadari has that mission at all. >> like i said, i don't watch a whole lot of tv. >> frontiersman doesn't have a lot to say about that, when you're reading frontiersman? >> apparently not. >> do you believe the u.s. should reason with president ahmadinejad? >> yeah, i think we should reason with everyone. >> barack obama is so offbase in his proclamation that he would meet with some of these leaders around our world that would seek to destroy america. >> i'm new to politics, i don't know a whole lot, you know? >> okay, i'm voting for levi, but it's up to you. who handled the questions better, levi or sarah. go to our blog at thelastword@msnbc.com. we'll have the results tomorrow. and also tomorrow,